Side 1 of Foxtrot is by and large pop, in terms of structure. Which is fine if you pretend Supper's Ready doesn't exist. But Dancing with the moonlit knight is not pop by any stretch of imagination nor are Musical Box or Fountain of Salmacis.

Pop in terms of stucture? What tosh. Why is it not rock in terms of structure? This whole argument is frustrating.

Hardly any difference in terms of structure between pop and rock (i.e. not prog) anyway. But in either case, not progressive in terms of structure, if I might put it that way instead.

I'd rather you did...or say "simple song structure"

But I disagree either way.

Yes, simple song structure is exactly what I had in mind. As for the second line, well, why am I not surprised!

Side 1 of Foxtrot is by and large pop, in terms of structure. Which is fine if you pretend Supper's Ready doesn't exist. But Dancing with the moonlit knight is not pop by any stretch of imagination nor are Musical Box or Fountain of Salmacis.

Pop in terms of stucture? What tosh. Why is it not rock in terms of structure? This whole argument is frustrating.

Hardly any difference in terms of structure between pop and rock (i.e. not prog) anyway. But in either case, not progressive in terms of structure, if I might put it that way instead.

I'd rather you did...or say "simple song structure"

But I disagree either way.

Yes, simple song structure is exactly what I had in mind. As for the second line, well, why am I not surprised!

Maybe I should listen again but Get em out by Friday has many different passages and can -utlity is Prog for sure isn't it? Watcher of the Skies without Mellotron would be heavy rock.

But if you disagree, Suppers Ready could be viewed as a number of simple songs strung together(with the exceptuion of a few parts)

Side 1 of Foxtrot is by and large pop, in terms of structure. Which is fine if you pretend Supper's Ready doesn't exist. But Dancing with the moonlit knight is not pop by any stretch of imagination nor are Musical Box or Fountain of Salmacis.

Pop in terms of stucture? What tosh. Why is it not rock in terms of structure? This whole argument is frustrating.

Hardly any difference in terms of structure between pop and rock (i.e. not prog) anyway. But in either case, not progressive in terms of structure, if I might put it that way instead.

I'd rather you did...or say "simple song structure"

But I disagree either way.

Yes, simple song structure is exactly what I had in mind. As for the second line, well, why am I not surprised!

Maybe I should listen again but Get em out by Friday has many different passages and can -utlity is Prog for sure isn't it? Watcher of the Skies without Mellotron would be heavy rock.

But if you disagree, Suppers Ready could be viewed as a number of simple songs strung together(with the exceptuion of a few parts)

To me, Get em out and Can Utility are sort of like Love Lies Bleeding, so not quite there. In Supper's Ready, the 'songs' seamlessly blend and segue into each other except for a few moments where the music seems unrelated around the 10 minute mark. And rather than developing in a cyclical pattern, which is what pop is, it shows more linear development with effective use of reiteration. The melody on "Walking across the sitting room" is repeated on flute to connect to a different passage of music. Again, the "Eternal Sanctuary Man" stanza is reprised for "As Sure As Eggs is Eggs", evoking the feeling of the culmination of a journey. But none of the different vocal melodies are used in a verse chorus pattern.

It's chords with vocals..... and neither the chords nor the vocals are innovative ...

That's just absurd.It weren't innovative if they mimicked previous bands which isn't true.Maybe you should define this two words:1.pop

2.innovation

However you're somehow right about the lyric.

p.s As you're in PA for a long time, you've certainly said that before so it may be repetitive for you, why don't you just tell the gist of your thoughts to explain how do you really see prog and what do you expect from a prog song?

How do I see prog? Well, 'Prog Rock' is a historic genre of the 1970s that I certainly don't deny Genesis belong to, with all their Mellotron noodling and [eventual] complex song structures.

'Progressive' is not a genre, however, but a word, and we all know what it means. Genesis, before SEbtP, were not, in my opinion, particularly progressive, and to give an example of a significant body of their work that is closer in style to pop and that isn't innovative, I gave you Foxtrot, side one. I haven't heard any earlier albums so I can't comment, but I would be surprised if they were more like Selling England....

Pop just means popular, and it is largely interchangeable with the word rock when we're talking about Genesis in the early seventies. That's what the music they made was. Get 'Em Out By Friday (a song I wasn't planning on listening to so many times over the last couple of days, because I hate it) has a pop structure that merely takes a long time to happen. There is a little intro, plenty of verses and choruses, and some kind of bridge. They didn't mimic any specific previous bands, but that alone is no reason to say 'Genesis were innovative'. A rather conventional arrangement is used on that song and others, a rock rhythm section, with keyboards providing the chords (which are hardly the most adventurous), and a guy singing. The guitar doesn't have a lot to do, but when it does, it's nothing that wouldn't be found outside rock music in general.

Does that make it bad? No (although, for other reasons, I don't really enjoy it). Does it make it progressive though? Also no. Supper's Ready is, however, a song that is progressive in some ways, although I would still argue that it was considerably less innovative and ground-breaking than the music of Yes, ELP and especially King Crimson.

People react badly to criticism of Genesis because there is a lot of love for the band here........ now that I've explained my opinion, I hope it receives less hostility.

Side 1 of Foxtrot is by and large pop, in terms of structure. Which is fine if you pretend Supper's Ready doesn't exist. But Dancing with the moonlit knight is not pop by any stretch of imagination nor are Musical Box or Fountain of Salmacis.

Pop in terms of stucture? What tosh. Why is it not rock in terms of structure? This whole argument is frustrating.

Hardly any difference in terms of structure between pop and rock (i.e. not prog) anyway. But in either case, not progressive in terms of structure, if I might put it that way instead.

I'd rather you did...or say "simple song structure"

But I disagree either way.

Yes, simple song structure is exactly what I had in mind. As for the second line, well, why am I not surprised!

Maybe I should listen again but Get em out by Friday has many different passages and can -utlity is Prog for sure isn't it? Watcher of the Skies without Mellotron would be heavy rock.

But if you disagree, Suppers Ready could be viewed as a number of simple songs strung together(with the exceptuion of a few parts)

As Rogerthat said, it's largely still a cohesive work, and it is progressive, as I'm sure you'll agree. The other songs perhaps seem so, but the only difference between them and the other rock songs of the time would be the increase in length, due to the number of verses and whatnot it took Genesis to get out all of their ideas.

Foxtrot, as a whole, adds barely anything new to the table when it comes to musical innovation, and that is how this argument got started, because I see quite a large gap there between this band and the groups who were pushing boundaries.

How do I see prog? Well, 'Prog Rock' is a historic genre of the 1970s that I certainly don't deny Genesis belong to, with all their Mellotron noodling and [eventual] complex song structures.

'Progressive' is not a genre, however, but a word, and we all know what it means. Genesis, before SEbtP, were not, in my opinion, particularly progressive, and to give an example of a significant body of their work that is closer in style to pop and that isn't innovative, I gave you Foxtrot, side one. I haven't heard any earlier albums so I can't comment, but I would be surprised if they were more like Selling England....

Pop just means popular, and it is largely interchangeable with the word rock when we're talking about Genesis in the early seventies. That's what the music they made was. Get 'Em Out By Friday (a song I wasn't planning on listening to so many times over the last couple of days, because I hate it) has a pop structure that merely takes a long time to happen. There is a little intro, plenty of verses and choruses, and some kind of bridge. They didn't mimic any specific previous bands, but that alone is no reason to say 'Genesis were innovative'. A rather conventional arrangement is used on that song and others, a rock rhythm section, with keyboards providing the chords (which are hardly the most adventurous), and a guy singing. The guitar doesn't have a lot to do, but when it does, it's nothing that wouldn't be found outside rock music in general.

Does that make it bad? No (although, for other reasons, I don't really enjoy it). Does it make it progressive though? Also no. Supper's Ready is, however, a song that is progressive in some ways, although I would still argue that it was considerably less innovative and ground-breaking than the music of Yes, ELP and especially King Crimson.

People react badly to criticism of Genesis because there is a lot of love for the band here........ now that I've explained my opinion, I hope it receives less hostility.

If you were a musician, you'd know that even Justin Bieber's songs are detailed.No song is simple, it's not like saying "well, let's add some mellotron to this". Music composing, I believe, is not an easy task.Those who compose muse know what I'm exactly talking about.Foxtrot, as you know, released in 1970 which progressive rock was still an infant, they got more mature with time.Every bands need time to develop their skills and Genesis is no exception.

terms pop, rock, prog, ... aren't enough fulfilling and clear, therefore not good for analyzing a song and its composing details.Actually those are suitable for the reference in conventional conversations not using them to determine a music structure professionally.

How do I see prog? Well, 'Prog Rock' is a historic genre of the 1970s that I certainly don't deny Genesis belong to, with all their Mellotron noodling and [eventual] complex song structures.

'Progressive' is not a genre, however, but a word, and we all know what it means. Genesis, before SEbtP, were not, in my opinion, particularly progressive, and to give an example of a significant body of their work that is closer in style to pop and that isn't innovative, I gave you Foxtrot, side one. I haven't heard any earlier albums so I can't comment, but I would be surprised if they were more like Selling England....

Pop just means popular, and it is largely interchangeable with the word rock when we're talking about Genesis in the early seventies. That's what the music they made was. Get 'Em Out By Friday (a song I wasn't planning on listening to so many times over the last couple of days, because I hate it) has a pop structure that merely takes a long time to happen. There is a little intro, plenty of verses and choruses, and some kind of bridge. They didn't mimic any specific previous bands, but that alone is no reason to say 'Genesis were innovative'. A rather conventional arrangement is used on that song and others, a rock rhythm section, with keyboards providing the chords (which are hardly the most adventurous), and a guy singing. The guitar doesn't have a lot to do, but when it does, it's nothing that wouldn't be found outside rock music in general.

Does that make it bad? No (although, for other reasons, I don't really enjoy it). Does it make it progressive though? Also no. Supper's Ready is, however, a song that is progressive in some ways, although I would still argue that it was considerably less innovative and ground-breaking than the music of Yes, ELP and especially King Crimson.

People react badly to criticism of Genesis because there is a lot of love for the band here........ now that I've explained my opinion, I hope it receives less hostility.

If you were a musician, you'd know that even Justin Bieber's songs are detailed.No song is simple, it's not like saying "well, let's add some mellotron to this". Music composing, I believe, is not an easy task.Those who compose muse know what I'm exactly talking about.Foxtrot, as you know, released in 1970 which progressive rock was still an infant, they got more mature with time.Every bands need time to develop their skills and Genesis is no exception.

terms pop, rock, prog, ... aren't enough fulfilling and clear, therefore not good for analyzing a song and its composing details.Actually those are suitable for the reference in conventional conversations not using them to determine a music structure professionally.

Perhaps, a lesson in not making assumptions is needed today.

I am a musician.

I am studying composition at a world class conservatoire of music.

Music composing, I agree, is not an easy task. I should know.

That has no bearing whatsoever on my opinion of the skill of Genesis, or their level of progressiveness. I judge other rock bands on similar terms.

There is no problem with the words or language...... I'm just using them in a way that must annoy you.

I said myself that Genesis would develop into a decent and progressive band in 1973.

There is no problem with the words or language...... I'm just using them in a way that must annoy you.

Yes, I wanted to bring this up....to say that which is not PROGRESSIVE is just pop with mellotron is far fetched. I knew what you were getting at, but it was an over simplified way of putting it, especially if applied to the entire output of Genesis. Tracks like Los Endos clearly don't have anything to do with pop even if they may not be highly innovative. I don't think innovation is the USP of Genesis anyway...emotion and theater is.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum